News 2019 Rumour File - discuss rumours here!

Status
Not open for further replies.

arrowman

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 27, 2004
13,332
16,377
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
They will do their review and have a process in place like they do on all companies, just adapt it to suit the industry and company and compare with the other clubs as that is the only comparison they can draw upon. They will compare with the Wsst Coast and Hawks and also GC and Melbourne and find a happy medium Im sure

The biggest item they will look at is historical results as you cant review a company unless you can see its results, not projections

What do you think they will find from results, with on and off field as they will do both
Not at all accountants analyse results and facts, also how those results are obtained , that's how Ive found both deloittes and KPMG never had much to do with Earnst and Yong apart from answering some audit questions for them

So financially the club is strong, and membership wise it is strong, compared to the other teams

On Field our results are middle of the road

They are very fact driven, they don't draw upon opinions to often

How do you think the review will look based on the results we show?

I think the review will show off field the club knows clearly what its doing and onfield we are middle of the road with room for improvement, based on results purely

Why do you persist with this idea that an organisational review by a firm like KPMG (or E&Y, or PwC) is some sort of variation on a financial audit? It has been discussed enough on this board, and in particular the nature of these firms and the work they do, that it should be clear by now.

Actual results - financial or on-field - are peripheral to such a review. A club commissions such a review BECAUSE their results have not been satisfactory, they don't do it because they want someone to look at their results and benchmark them. OK, that sort of thing might get a mention, but it will be peripheral in the sense that they will be mentioned as the backdrop to the review and the basis for recommendations eg:

"Recommendation 1: Sack Brett Burton. This will address the issues raised by stakeholders (refer Section 4.5 of the report) and improve the club's ability to achieve its stated goal, listed in the Terms of Reference under 2.3.1: Win Premierships."

It is not an audit. The people conducting the review will not be auditors. Benchmarks, facts and figures - financial or on-field - will be mentioned, of course, but they will be peripheral.
 

arrowman

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 27, 2004
13,332
16,377
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Will they interview players about personalities at the club or is it processes and structures.

IMO that would depend on the scope the reviewers are given, within their terms of reference but also whether the reviewers ask for certain things like "we want to interview the players" or "we will conduct a structured survey of the players" etc.

Baseline would be to analyse processes and structures, and maybe compare them to other (successful) operations in the same industry. But you can't properly assess the effectiveness of those processes and structures without comment / feedback from people within them.

So IMO the effectiveness of a review is going to be dependent on both what access the reviewers ask for, and what they are given.

Or burton might be doing everything by the book but if everyone hates him because he’s a dick, is he going to be recommend to be moved on?

I doubt that a review like this would result in a specific recommendation that a particular individual be "moved on", these firms don't usually pull out the axe on individuals. But the surrounding material about their area of responsibility, stakeholder feedback etc etc would leave a clear enough message.
 

marty36

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 17, 2009
26,372
9,223
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Why do you persist with this idea that an organisational review by a firm like KPMG (or E&Y, or PwC) is some sort of variation on a financial audit? It has been discussed enough on this board, and in particular the nature of these firms and the work they do, that it should be clear by now.

Actual results - financial or on-field - are peripheral to such a review. A club commissions such a review BECAUSE their results have not been satisfactory, they don't do it because they want someone to look at their results and benchmark them. OK, that sort of thing might get a mention, but it will be peripheral in the sense that they will be mentioned as the backdrop to the review and the basis for recommendations eg:

"Recommendation 1: Sack Brett Burton. This will address the issues raised by stakeholders (refer Section 4.5 of the report) and improve the club's ability to achieve its stated goal, listed in the Terms of Reference under 2.3.1: Win Premierships."

It is not an audit. The people conducting the review will not be auditors. Benchmarks, facts and figures - financial or on-field - will be mentioned, of course, but they will be peripheral.

I didn't persist with anything it was a rumour by Rucci that KPMG would be used that was posted

Have a go at Rucci not me
 

arrowman

Brownlow Medallist
Jul 27, 2004
13,332
16,377
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
I didn't persist with anything it was a rumour by Rucci that KPMG would be used that was posted

Have a go at Rucci not me
Um, that's not the point. It's got nothing to do with Rucci/KPMG - it could be PwC, E&Y, Deloitte - doesn't matter. What you've been talking all along about a review by such a firm being some sort of glorified audit focused on analysis of results by accountants. Because you don't understand the nature of such a review or the firms that conduct them. You were saying this before the Rucci rumour was posted.
 
Aug 17, 2007
57,022
57,818
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
The Autobots and Team America
But you are thinking too short term there mate.

We need to think about the 2021 / 2022 seasons. Keath will be 30 by then and anything but dynamic!! Hartigan needs to go too, or become SANFL backup.

I feel the same about Greenwood. He only has a couple of years in him ... Better to trade that out and get young talent into his role ASAP ... And I love what Hugh brings in terms of point of difference.

It's the same reason why, even though he is close to my favourite AFC footballer, the idea of Brad Crouch seeking better opportunities might be what is best for the team. Trade him out now while he has good value - after a year of no injuries, because our next two years are about rebuilding the club.

I can't see how we fit Sloane and Mrouch and Brouch into our midfield if we expect to improve.

It's gotta be a harsh transition. As Clarkson said ... Catastrophic change!

Sent using Tapatalk App on Android.
Butts is the one to take over from Keath or Talia by the time they are 30. But we need another young KPD.

I am not adverse to trading out BCrouch. But it should be for something decent.

Personally think you add some midfield class to the Crouchs and Sloane you have a fairly decent midfield.

But since there is no SA player that fits that profile we will never be able to trade one in.



Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 

ad victoriam

Brownlow Medallist
Jan 2, 2016
10,839
9,341
Barossa
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
CDFC
Will they interview players about personalities at the club or is it processes and structures.
Or burton might be doing everything by the book but if everyone hates him because he’s a dick, is he going to be recommend to be moved on?
They will have a Human resource consultant or one already on there books, who would be looking at the employee/employer relationship/interactions in a football sense it would Player to coach, Player to management, Coach to management Coach to Board. Board to players etc.
In a few cases, managers are recommended to be moved because they are not good people managers ie nobodies friend. then there are good people managers who are failing to get the message across, ie everybody friend,
These consultants are all about the message and the way of getting that message across thru the whole organisation to believe one of the catchphrases these days is employee engagement. Old school it was all about getting everyone to pull in the same direction.
And yes these consultants do understand not everyone is happy with the present direction and that some are happy. They also have some ability in reading a room/reading a person. That's why there is generally a team of People doing the review.
 

marty36

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 17, 2009
26,372
9,223
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Um, that's not the point. It's got nothing to do with Rucci/KPMG - it could be PwC, E&Y, Deloitte - doesn't matter. What you've been talking all along about a review by such a firm being some sort of glorified audit focused on analysis of results by accountants. Because you don't understand the nature of such a review or the firms that conduct them. You were saying this before the Rucci rumour was posted.


Your not with the programme are you, its a rumour thread, Rucci has publicly stated it will KPMG according to Anzacpaul

I stated previously that if Richmond used Earnst and Young we might use one of the other big accountancy firms

Do you think Richmond made an error in using Earnst and young before they grabbed their premiership glory

If your answer is yes they shouldn't have, I suppose you are right and YOU don't think we should use an firm like that

But it appears to have worked for the tigers
 
Oct 15, 2012
11,815
21,844
Hobart
AFL Club
Adelaide
Butts is the one to take over from Keath or Talia by the time they are 30. But we need another young KPD.

I am not adverse to trading out BCrouch. But it should be for something decent.

Personally think you add some midfield class to the Crouchs and Sloane you have a fairly decent midfield.

But since there is no SA player that fits that profile we will never be able to trade one in.
Ain't that the truth. We suffer from SA GREAT attitude still ... where only people living in SA think SA is great.
 
Aug 17, 2007
57,022
57,818
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
The Autobots and Team America
Ain't that the truth. We suffer from SA GREAT attitude still ... where only people living in SA think SA is great.
Surely the $1.2m we suppsedly have for Grundy would make SA Great for Cognelio or Whitfield?

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
 
Oct 9, 2004
65,120
89,016
Adelaide
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
CDFC
No one knows, but I doubt they would be caling for a financial review alone, for a club succeeding in that area, you would think its an entire club review covering everything including financial as the may cross over into saying we should spend more money, but if the finances dont allow it, that wont be recommended
You confused me by answering about a financial review.
 
Oct 20, 2015
7,173
11,195
In a Galaxy Far, Far Away
AFL Club
Adelaide
Other Teams
Liverpool
Heard from a solid source that Jenkins to Geelong (who clearly don't have a salary cap) is a done deal. We will also be paying $250k of his salary to move him.
Not sure if we are getting anything back or just getting him out, but that's the deal.
Was talked about by Crows players over the weekend.
No way would I do that deal unless we get a much better pick than he's worth. 1st or 2nd rounder.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back